Even after Senate Republicans blocked me from speaking on the United States Senate floor last Thursday, I will not pipe down about Senate Republicans and the oil industry’s Keystone XL pipeline pipe dream.

I have tried to debate two of my amendments to the Keystone XL pipeline legislation. The first would ban the re-export of the Canadian tar sands transported through the Keystone pipeline and the gasoline and other products made from that oil, so we would keep it here in America.

The second would close the tax loophole that gives Canadian tar sands a tax free ride through our country by not having to pay into the oil spill fund. That means if this Canadian tar sands oil spills as it moves through this straw we are building across America, it would be American taxpayers who would foot the bill.

Leader Mitch McConnell and Republican leadership promised an open amendment process, but they have closed down debate, and they aren’t allowing up-or-down votes on important Democratic amendments.

Here’s the reason why: They know if they allow real debate and real votes on these amendments, their arguments for this Keystone pipeline pipe dream will be shown as completely hollow.

They know that if they allow real debate and real votes on exports, they’ll prove this pipeline was never about energy independence, even after all of their rhetoric and the ads saying Keystone is about “North American energy security.”

They know that if they allow real debate and real votes on closing an oil company tax loophole, they’ll prove that they are Big Oil boosters who will kill clean energy tax incentives but preserve oil company tax breaks.

Senate Republicans are trying to ram through a pipeline that could spill and harm drinking water sources, and now they are poisoning the Senate well by closing off debate.

We need an up-or-down vote on my amendments that put Senators on the record about whether they favor the interests of the oil industry over those of consumers, businesses, our climate, and our national security. Senate Republicans should not be allowed to shut down this important national debate.

It can’t produce oil profitably at current prices and the new Saudi King was quick to mention that $100 a barrel oil is unlikely, maybe never again.

It’s the Koch brothers, various oil service contractors like Halliburton and similar usual suspects trying to leverage a dead cat that will not bounce.

As it is, the oil plays that cost more per barrel than this Saudi benchmark area are all folding. The market has spoken, but the GOP isn’t listening.

0

0

thoughtful

5 years ago

I have a hard time believing that Senator Markey could actually have written this post.

If so, he must think his constituents have been on another planet the past six years during which time Harry Reid controlled the Senate. Granted Markey was in the House for most of Reid’s reign, but he was a Senator long enough to participate with Reid in essentially shutting down the Senate from taking a vote on just about anything of substance. Reid actions, with Markey’s help stifled debate and were a real disservice to our nation.

Before playing the typical Washington demonetization game and point fingers against “big oil, the Koch brothers and those evil republicans, in fairness the Senator should probably mention that 28 democrats in the House voted for the bill and at the end of the day at least 8 or 9 Senate Democrats will follow suit. There are obviously a significant number of Democrats in both chambers who do not view this as a partisan issue.

I could be wrong but I believe a good portion of the Alaska pipeline travels through Canada on is way into the continental states. I would be interested to know if the US pays into a Canadian Tax Spill Fund? And also do the Canadians tax that oil? And do they legislate what we can do with it and restrict whether or not we can sell the oil overseas?

Personally, the fact that the oil is being transported primary by rail is my biggest environmental concern and one in which a pipeline would go a long way towards solving.

Jan 13 (Reuters) – A DuPont and Co pesticide plant where four people died in a gas leak in November had been cited for emissions violations by a state agency on several occasions before the accident, the Houston Chronicle reported on Tuesday.

The newspaper cited public records it obtained as showing that DuPont reported regular malfunctions with a multimillion-dollar exhaust and ventilation system inside its La Porte, Texas, pesticide plant that exposed workers to potentially dangerous fumes well before the deadly accident.

…from Alaska across Canada to the lower 48, I don’t think such a thing exists. Care to show proof that it does?

There is a trans-Alaska pipeline, which gets oil from the north slope to southern Alaska, where it is shipped to refineries in tankers, but I can find no mention of a pipeline from Alaska to the lower 48 routed through Canada.

I don’t really understand the point of the first amendment. The point about oil security is that we don’t want to be at the mercy of OPEC or anyone else who could curtail supply. As long as Canadian oil is reaching the market, it’s helping to achieve that goal, even if it’s re-exported. And I suppose we could always ban reexport later if there were some extraordinary emergency.

I don’t know enough about existing law to judge the second amendment, though it seems more sensible to me. I gather that under current law the pipeline owner would not have to pay into the pipeline spill trust fund, but under current law, would the owner be liable for cleanup costs and other damages, either to the government or to affected landowners and others?

0

0

thoughtful

5 years ago

The amendments are not designed to be logical or accomplish anything more than creating cheap talking points and rabble rousing some far left activists.

The amendments are not designed to be logical or accomplish anything more than creating cheap talking points and rabble rousing some far left activists.

Replace ‘far left’ with ‘far right’ and you have every single thing the GOP in Congress has done for the last six years. At least in this case obstructionism is delaying an incredibly poorly thought out project that it’s backers no longer thing is economically viable, that won’t lower gas prices, and won’t create jobs.

I might agree that Sen. Markey’s amendments and other progressive stalling tactics are only delaying a very satisfying veto.

Just let the Repubs pass it already so Obama can whip out the big veto stamp. Nobody wants or needs this project. Good jobs are finally coming back since Obama’s economic policies have mostly worked (they woulda come back sooner had he focused on stimulus and not austerity), gas is the lowest it’s been since Obama helped make us energy independent ahead of schedule. Putin and Saudi Arabia’s economies are in the shitter since nobody needs their oil anymore. Why give a lifeline to Alberta?

Most Canadians are against this proposal even if their government favors it. Time to move on and veto the damn thing.

I for one am glad to see some much needed “obstruction” by D’s in the Senate on this horrible pipeline proposal — and Senator Markey’s amendments definitely proved that the Keystone boosters don’t care about creating jobs in the US, which is an important point to clarify for sure, especially since their jobs claims are absurd.

We must ban the use of tear gas by law enforcement. Tear gas is an indiscriminate weapon that was banned in warfare nearly 100 years ago. It is insane that we allow police to use it against protestors today.